Books and stuff

The underlying premise of Gladwell’s ‘The Bomber Mafia’ is the ‘trolley problem’ ethical experiment where the protagonists are those advocating for ‘precision’ bombing versus carpet bombing. We know that carpet (and for Japan, mass firebombing using the newly invented napalm) won the day but Gladwell comes down on the side of ‘precision’ bombing.

In this book, we have the ‘Bomber Mafia’, with Gladwell using the term Mafia to describe the clique or cabal of those professing the precision bombing of key sites as a strategy to shorten the war, versus Curtis Le May, who advocates the carpet and firebombing doctrine that seeks to wipe out grids on a map. The book is not a difficult read and doesn’t move far beyond its genesis as a podcast relying heavily on lengthy quotes and interview transcripts of key players and experts. The book lacks detail and very little to no quantitative argument for either doctrine. This makes for a fast-paced and easier read (with me taking a week to complete which is a very fast pace for myself) which gives the impression that completion of the book was dictated more by a schedule rather than a desire to offer an opinion backed by in-depth analysis and data. I have little knowledge of the events described and so may be harsh with these remarks, but I strongly suspect the book does little to expand the historic understanding and knowledge of those who have studied the subject. But, to be fair, this is not the intent of the book and Gladwell does not make any claims to attempt such a goal.

Where I am disappointed though is the lack of any modern-day evidence as to why Gladwell supports precision bombing. Some facts or figures would be the bare minimum to at least attempt to convince the reader. However, I am extremely critical of the book as the key evidence (in my view) Gladwell provides as to the superiority of precision bombing is we can now end war quicker is the discussion at the end of the book with senior officers about how accurate current missiles are. A very strange conclusion given all major conflicts the U.S. has led since World War 2 have lasted longer than that war! Further, once we see through the government and vested interest spin applied to how wonderful modern weapons are, they are just as cruel as other weapons whose sole purpose is to kill. Innocent citizens continue to be killed by erroneous ‘precision’ missiles that miss their mark, and wars are not settled any quicker. 

  ‘The Little Prince’ is a short but powerful story with an ending that is heartbreaking yet heartwarming. This is a famous book and one that I really had no intention of acquiring other than its Latin translation. This changed as I conducted my Christmas shopping (itself ironic given one of the main messages of the book is to live with what we have.).

On face value. ‘The Little Prince’ is a story that reads as a simple children’s fable but take the time to ponder and think about the words and there is much for the adult reader to reflect upon. The most important message that I admire are:

· the most important things cannot be seen with our own eyes but only with our heart

· when we tame something, it belongs to us forever and we are duty bound to look after it

· thousands of roses look the same but not the one you look after; it is different as you have looked after it

But the most lasting message is to know that when we look at something, we can feel sad. Yet we can look at the same thing at another time and feel happiness. The lamb was not drawn with a muzzle so it may eat the rose on the prince’s planet. But the Prince had a dome to place on the flower. But he may forget to place the dome over the rose. And on it goes. And so, what brings us joy can also bring us pain. And so, we ponder what is it that really brings us joy?

The ending brings thoughts of potential suicide and the afterward does hint that some postulate the author may have taken his own life during the war. Yet, given it is war surely his plane crashing is more likely (Occam’s razor and all that).

A definite read and get your kids to read it early and often.

  A very enjoyable read of Hugh Aplin’s translation of Mikhail Bulgakov’s “The Master and Margarita”. I’ll defer to any Russian reader’s to comment on the original which I am sure is better but this English version is very entertaining. 

The story is completely ludicrous yet at the same time you can clearly accept every adventure that is happening. The plot deal with the Devil and his entourage’s visit to Moscow and the havoc they create, especially those poor individuals who work at the Variety. 

The book is very entertaining and much of its appeal is a result of its unpredictability. The first chapter deals with Beriloz and Bezdomny’s fateful encounter with Woland (an encounter very fateful for Beriloz!). Yet, the second chapter takes us back to Jerusalem and Pontius Pilate’s torments. The unpredictability continues as we don’t meet the Master until later in part one and Margarita is not introduced until part two of the novel.

I don’t like to write too much about specific plot details but rather summarize some key thoughts now I have completed the book.

The Devil in Bulgakov’s book is, in my view, not an evil figure however he seems to be thought of today. I am an atheist so won’t profess to know his background but here is is presented as a somewhat benevolent figure and subservient to God. Rather than making people stray - Bulgakov does not bore us with tropes of buying people’s sole in exchange for granting wishes – Woland and his court merely exposes (and at times punishes) people’s peccancy. 

Knowing the book was banned in Russia, I do try to consider the allusions the book draws with the corresponding period of Stalin’s regime (spanning the period when the book was written). However, in doing so I feel I am compelled to draw on biases from a western education. For example are the investigation results detailed in the epilogue an inference to presenting the official version of the “truth” under a Stalinist regime where only atheism is tolerated? Are the details of the extravagance of the elitist Massolit restaurant calling out the advantages the elite enjoy even in a socialist society? And, surely the ostracisation of the Master having written a book that has fallen foul of the Massolit elite and arbitrators of socialist acceptability calls out the lack of artistic freedom?

Anyway, back to the book. Woland, Behemoth, Koroveyev and Azazello are very likeable characters. I was very fond of Azeazello and his guidance and help proffered to Margarita. As for Behemoth: cat by name and very much cat by nature! Bulgakov/Aplin also take us on Margarita’s journey and the reader must be impressed by her loyalty (as Woland and God surely are).

This one of those rare books were there is little superfluous text and no distracting subplots. I also suspect that it could be one of those books were you could gain more by a second or even third read. I know the Bulgakov is more renowned as a playwright, and I feel this skill is apparent in this book as I doubt it would take much to adapt this to the theatre. Indeed, I have seen uploads on Youtube of a Soviet made mini=series of the novel fortunately with subtitles which I hope to watch in full now I have finished the book.

The only criticism is on me as I found it difficult to keep up with many of the characters’ Russian names and the frequent variations of them. I should do a better job to educate myself in this area next time. But read the book, it’s great.

My summarized points after reading Captain Corelli’s Mandolin. Dot point because I’m lazy and comments are in no particular order. Just adding some content to the site so if things are wrong, so be it…

· I felt the first half of the novel was a bit pedestrian, but it picked up in the second half (maybe too much effort on historical context in the first half?) and rather than what the title suggests this is primarily the story of two people: Pelagia and Carlo

· I did feel melancholy as I read the second half more so having suffered a family loss as I was reading this book

· The book is all about Pelagia and her life – I did become attached to her character with her life of memories, pain and “if only” regrets on so many events during her life

· The characters intertwined well with each other but at times I felt let down with the lack of detail and felt some characters could have been explored in more detail

· Oddly, I also felt disappointed with the final chapter. It felt forced and rushed to make the reader “leave the theatre happy”. I don’t think this worked with too much being “rounded off” too quickly. I saccharine ending did spoil it slightly for me as the author did a great job in leaving me hoping for Corelli’s return but also as I neared the end, finally resigning myself to his not returning. A final plot twist for sure and maybe this is what the author intended?

· But maybe my views on the ending are too simple and I am too simple – this to me is a book of pain and loss and maybe, like Pelagia, I am angry that Corelli returned too late. Yet, I feel the writing of his return was too simple and I was wanting to know more of his pain and regrets rather than what little we learnt in the last 20 or so pages

· I would recommend this book but it really could have been an epic tale, maybe even a generational tale

 Books I've enjoyed in the past and those that didn't excite me. My views only…

Double Thumbs Up:

Power Without Glory (Frank Hardy): one of the most unsung Australian novels. It should be compulsory reading at school and one of the few books I've read more than once.

Salonica: City of Ghosts (Mark Mazower): I was probably biased having bought a copy in Thessalonica and read it upon my return from Greece so I could relate to the content.

The General of the Dead Army (Ismail Kadare): a simple plot but vividly told with abiding memories of mud and brandy. It is hard to imagine the pain on both sides with such an activity occurring after the war.

Thumbs Up:

Mythos(Stephen Fry): along with Heroes, these are a great way to get acquainted with Greek mythology.

Heroes(Stephen Fry)

The Trial (Franz Kafka)

Metamorphosis (Franz Kafka): just weird how a book about a person slowly turning into an insect can be so interesting.

The General of the Dead Army (Ismail Kadare): far better than The Concernt, I really feel for both sides having to participate in the repatriation of the invading army’s dead. Two things stick in my mind: the mud, and the drinking of brandy.

Eureka: The Unfinished Revolution (Peter FitzSimmons): Ballarat is a great city s this is a relatable book that is readable, packing with interesting facts but doesn’t make any pretentions to be scholarly (and I mean no disrespect in this comment)

Peter Pan (Jessica Owers): A horse I have always felt as being overlooked no doubt because of his racing so soon after Phar Lap, this is a very good book within a genre where various books get stale if the reader has a good knowledge of the subject. 

Van Gogh’s Ear (Bernadette Murphy): surprisingly good and engaging. Well researched and while speculative, it gives a great insight into the painter’s life and mental struggles.

Burmese Days (George Orwell): who knew waiting for the ice shipment could be the main topic of a society!

A Farewell to Arms (E. Hemingway): I did not study Hemingway at school and this is the only novel of his to date I have read and I was happy that I liked it as I was not sure if I would like Hemingway. I liked the large amounts of dialogue between characters (and I never knew they went to the races!)

Thumbs Sideways:

The Phantom of the Opera (Gaston LeRoux): very readable but I couldn’t help but always replay the live show (which was awesome) in my head as I read it.

The Concert (Ismail Kadare): in parts very good but I found some sub-plots distracting and I wanted to race through these to get back to the main plot. Maybe I missed how these tied to the main story?

Bart: My Life (J. B. Cummings): Okay given my interest in racing but a pretty formulaic autobiography that I am sure keeps many secrets hidden so as to retain the his saintly persona (why did Bart always return home to Adelaide on Sunday’s and people never seem to recall his brother was one of the country’s largest punters)

Fahrenheit 451 (Ray Bradbury)

We(Yevgeny Zamyatin): it is said by some that this is the inspiration for Orwell’s 1984 and this may be so but the dialogue is very hard to follow and I often lost track who was saying what so downgrading it for that. 

A Horse Called Mighty (Helen Thomas): I enjoy these books but there really is little to work with if you do not have an interest in racing.

Thumbs Down:

The Man in the High Castle (P. K. Dick): saw some clips on Youtube and the television series looked intriguing. The book however was ordinary.

The Catcher in the Rye (J. D. Salinger): read it later in life as opposed to in school so maybe I missed having undertaken a guided study but really, it is nothing too memorable for me other than the name (Caulfield so only because of the race track) and the description of not cleaning the safety razor.

Empress Dowager Cixi (Jung Chang): just too biased with very little critical analysis of Cixi. I left feeling the author was simply to wrapped up in her lofy opinion of Cixi to offer any balance. Readable though.

Those I started but am yet to finish, and maybe never will:

Seven Years in Tibet (H. Harder): would probably pick it up again before visiting Tibet.

The Last King of Scotland (Giles Folden)

The Penguin Book of Classical Myths (Jenny March): This is a good book! I use it more as a reference rather than as a start to finish read.

President of Whores (PJ O’Rourke): garbage

Invasion 1940 (Intro by J Erickson): wont go back

The Prince (Niccolò Machiavelli): started to read it but I just bore of it and feel you read because everyone else says they have read it.

Homage to Catalonia (George Orwell): will go back and complete, just got distracted by other things